| zafer |
| specs say 6 spd man., photos show auto? |
|
|
| DaleB |
| Apparently a 6 speed manual is available too. |
|
|
| dipersp |
| Yeh, unfortunately, it's said that it's a knockoff of a GM product from Australia, and they did very little to clean it up and get it ready. Received terrible reviews. Shame they had to use that name on it. But I guess they screw up everything they do - looks at cars like the classic Malibu, for example! Case closed on the GM book. |
|
|
| trixie |
| GTO performance, Grand Am styling, Australian build quality. GM gets credit for one out of three. Too sad. I think I'll pass. |
|
|
| socalJD |
Forget about Dad's, this isn't anywheres near MY GTO . . .
My goat was a 1970 'Judge': 400 RamAir IV, 4 speed Muncie tranny, Hurst shifter, 3.93 10 bolt posi rear, sport suspension - I have no idea why they slap the revered 'GTO' badge on this POS . . . pee yew :3: :mad: :( |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by socalJD
Forget about Dad's, this isn't anywheres near MY GTO . . .
My goat was a 1970 'Judge': 400 RamAir IV, 4 speed Muncie tranny, Hurst shifter, 3.93 10 bolt posi rear, sport suspension - I have no idea why they slap the revered 'GTO' badge on this POS . . . pee yew :3: :mad: :(
I hear ya.. what a disservice after they have been pimping the Bonnevilles and Grand Prixs for so long....then they really short-change the old flagship of them all. |
|
|
| bone324 |
| I drove the new GTO 6-speed on a closed course. I wasn't impressed at all for the price. Maybe if they knocked $5k+ off the price (which they probably will be doing soon). There are several cars for equal or less that are better in every category. |
|
|
| DaleB |
| So it barely has the heart of a 'Vette, and certainly not the cajones. |
|
|
| bone324 |
| Don't get me wrong, it's not a slow car. But for the price, you could do alot better. The exhaust note is great too. Handling seems a little soft for a performance car. |
|
|
| hopeitsfriday |
The styling on the new GTO is very disappointing, even the Monty SS, which I thought was kind of plain looking, is better looking than the GTO. From what I understand, it has a nice drive train, but too bad is wasted because it is cover by a less than out standing chassis. Maybe they are going for that wolf in the sheep skin thing, but i doult it.
BTW, I would take the old GTO over the new one anyday, even if the old GTO gets like 8 MPG. |
|
|
| socalJD |
quote:
Originally posted by hopeitsfriday
. . . I would take the old GTO over the new one anyday, even if the old GTO gets like 8 MPG . . .
Gas mileage wasn't the problem, keeping any tread on your rear tires and not blowing out your rear end every 6 months was the real challenge . . . :D :D :D |
|
|
| trixie |
quote:
Originally posted by socalJD
Gas mileage wasn't the problem, keeping any tread on your rear tires and not blowing out your rear end every 6 months was the real challenge . . . :D :D :D
I drove a 69 SS396 Chevelle through most of the 80s. The car was all stock, equiped with a stock rebuilt L34 motor, 3.73 posi, and Muncie M-21 4 speed. The drivetrain was tough and tires were cheap. The motor wailed at 4,000 RPMs at 80 MPH and was good for about 10 MPG--if you took it easy. GM recommended 98 octane leaded premium and the available 92 octane leaded fuel at $1.50/gallon caused nothing but detonation. Timing had to be retarded to the point of serious consequences to HP. If the temperature rose above 80, you could forget about nailing the gas. Although torque was undeniable, I'm not sure that the old car could beat my X in a drag. My 01 Maxima would certainly blow the doors off the old Chevelle. It's not a surprise that decent muscle cars were were selling for $2,000 in 1980. Perhaps not a problem in the 60s, gas mileage and poor performance were major muscle car shortcomings during the 80s. A few decades pass and we forget the faults our our beloved beasts. |
|
|
|
